REVscene - Vancouver Automotive Forum


Welcome to the REVscene Automotive Forum forums.

Registration is Free!You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.


Go Back   REVscene Automotive Forum > Automotive Chat > Vancouver Off-Topic / Current Events

Vancouver Off-Topic / Current Events The off-topic forum for Vancouver, funnies, non-auto centered discussions, WORK SAFE. While the rules are more relaxed here, there are still rules. Please refer to sticky thread in this forum.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-26-2013, 05:45 PM   #26
I help report spam so I got this! <--
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,511
Thanked 909 Times in 417 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by E60_M5 View Post
They are not keeping things in check, they are minding other ppls business and just giving a hand to whoever that likes to bend over and bow down to them.
True but only to an extend. I speculate the only reason US is involved is because Japan is one of their closer allies. More than anything, it's a political gesture signifies the Chinese government to simmer down a little bit.

The Chinese government has been bullying other countries of their islands for a while. They have been doing the same thing to Vietnam with disputes over the Paracel Islands since 1974.
Advertisement
Nlkko is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 11-26-2013, 05:46 PM   #27
Head Moderator
 
Lomac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1982
Location: Great White Nor
Posts: 22,590
Thanked 6,400 Times in 2,052 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by FerrariEnzo View Post
cant believe all this dispute.. what is so great about this island?
The potential of oil underground.
Lomac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2013, 05:50 PM   #28
what manner of phaggotry is this
 
RRxtar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Kelownafornia
Posts: 17,971
Thanked 4,932 Times in 1,658 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lomac View Post
Gonna stay out of this convo, but wanted to add this picture I saw on BBC earlier today:

that pic was in the article the OP copy and pasted. may have helped if he copied the map too

i somehow assume that yellow blob in the middle of the disputed zone has something to do with it
__________________
STRENGTHaesthetics
RRxtar is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2013, 05:53 PM   #29
what manner of phaggotry is this
 
RRxtar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Kelownafornia
Posts: 17,971
Thanked 4,932 Times in 1,658 Posts
from Wiki

Quote:
The Chunxiao gas field (Chinese: 春晓油气田; pinyin: Chūnxiǎo yuqtin) is a natural gas field below the East China Sea allegedly within the Chinese Exclusive Economic Zone, about 4 km to the east of the EEZ border claimed by Japan which is disputed by China. The Chunxiao gas field is the first of a group of four natural gas fields in the Xihu Trough being developed by China: the other ones are Tianwaitian, Duanqiao, and Canxue.
Production from the field started on January 28, 2006.[1] CNOOC and Sinopec operate the site. Unocal and Shell withdrew from the project in late 2004 for reasons of high costs, unclear reserves, and the territorial dispute. CNOOC estimates net oil reserves of the field at 3.8 million Barrels of oil, and 168.6 BCF of natural gas.[2]
In 1995, the People's Republic of China discovered the undersea natural gas field in the East China Sea.[3] The field lies within the Chinese EEZ, although Japan believes it is possibly connected to reserves beyond its claimed median line of the East China Sea.[4] Japan maintains that, although the Chunxiao gas field rigs are on the PRC side of a median line that it regards as the two sides' sea boundary, China may tap into a field that stretches underground into disputed areas.[5] In June 2008, both sides agreed to jointly develop the Chunxiao gas fields.[5]
__________________
STRENGTHaesthetics
RRxtar is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2013, 06:32 PM   #30
I *heart* Revscene.net very Muchie
 
Bouncing Bettys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Bootyville
Posts: 3,693
Thanked 1,854 Times in 585 Posts
__________________
LEAFS!
Bouncing Bettys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2013, 06:33 PM   #31
Hacked RS to become a mod
 
SkinnyPupp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Sunny Hong Kong
Posts: 42,017
Thanked 17,635 Times in 5,342 Posts
Fucking someone hurry up an invent a new energy source so we can be peaceful while others go back to fighting over religion
SkinnyPupp is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 11-26-2013, 06:42 PM   #32
14 dolla balla aint got nothing on me!
 
JoshuaWong's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 637
Thanked 1,708 Times in 235 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lomac View Post
Gonna stay out of this convo, but wanted to add this picture I saw on BBC earlier today:

Maps really put things into perspective, every powerful country need their own area of influence/comfort zone for defense etc. Think of ur own personal space, what if someone comes up to you and intrude ur space claiming its their own, like in a packed elevator. Makes you uncomfortable doesn't it?

Looking at the map, China's claim isn't all that outrageous, compare to USA/Japan. Besides people only tend to remember recent history, China discovered and lay claim to these islands way before Japan took them in WW2, which Japan is suppose to hand over all territory taken by force anyways... Its about time China start fending for its own.

Its kind of just returning to how things were before, if you look at history China has always been the big bully in the area having its way. Only in the last 300 or so years did it fell behind. Well guess what, its coming back now. Martin Jacques does a lot of good explanation about why things is happening as such on China, very interesting stuff to understand more about all these stuff happening.
__________________
2013 Raven Black Scion FR-S
2009 Alpine White E92 M3 | Dinan | Akrapovic | Vorsteiner
2008 Jet Black E90 335i | Hartge | AC Schnitzer | Vishnu - Retired
JoshuaWong is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 11-26-2013, 06:55 PM   #33
OMGWTFBBQ is a common word I say everyday
 
DragonChi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: vancity
Posts: 5,266
Thanked 572 Times in 279 Posts
even if we solved our energy problems. we still have the problem of earth being able to provide a sustainable food supply. IMO we have a population problem too.

this reminds me of when Russia was trying to claim Canadian land in the Arctic circle because of oil.

I wonder how this is going to play out...
Posted via RS Mobile
DragonChi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2013, 06:56 PM   #34
Even when im right, revscene.net is still right!
 
Yodamaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Burnaby, BC
Posts: 1,324
Thanked 1,481 Times in 465 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkinnyPupp View Post
Fucking someone hurry up an invent a new energy source so we can be peaceful while others go back to fighting over religion
We don't need to, everything we need is already here, but oil companies keep lobbying to ensure that we don't switch until every last drop of oil is gone.

-Wind

-Hydro

-Solar

-Nuclear (thorium)


And yet, coal and oil are still the main producers of energy in this day and age. Water, wind, and our very own sun are all freely available for us to use in a respectful manner, and yet we resort to the difficult task of extracting oil from the earth and burning it for the grid.

It's these things that make me wish I could move to another planet.

Last edited by Yodamaster; 11-26-2013 at 07:02 PM.
Yodamaster is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
This post FAILED by:
Old 11-26-2013, 07:31 PM   #35
Prince of the Apes
 
bloodmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Abbotsford
Posts: 2,469
Thanked 3,046 Times in 672 Posts
one day yoda.. one day.. not in our lifetime but one day..
__________________
There's times in life where I want a relationship, but then I cum.
Quote:
[23-08, 13:17] nabs i've gripped ice boy's shaft before
Quote:
[26-08, 13:50] Jesusjuice is this a sports car forum? why are there so many hondas?
bloodmack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2013, 07:38 PM   #36
My homepage has been set to RS
 
tool001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: vancouver
Posts: 2,214
Thanked 810 Times in 274 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Razor Ramon HG View Post
Japan likes to wave its dick around when it comes to territorial disputes. While I'm not familiar with regards to the Senkaku Islands, Japan have been in a dispute with Korea over the Liancourt Rocks with little to no historial evidence.
Posted via RS Mobile
lol japan waves its dick? have u read up on China military posture against Vietnam and Philippines and now this? u need to read up a little..
tool001 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2013, 07:40 PM   #37
OMGWTFBBQ is a common word I say everyday
 
DragonChi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: vancity
Posts: 5,266
Thanked 572 Times in 279 Posts
The problem is that all those alternative energy methods are still expensive, unreliable, or will still have an environmental impact.
__________________
DragonChi's BuySell rating

Last edited by DragonChi; 11-26-2013 at 10:53 PM.
DragonChi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2013, 08:00 PM   #38
HELP ME PLS!!!
 
pastarocket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 5,902
Thanked 2,192 Times in 985 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lomac View Post
Gonna stay out of this convo, but wanted to add this picture I saw on BBC earlier today:

Based on the diagram, it looks like China has set its sight on that gas field in the East China Sea.

-just to add my two cents to this discussion. I think China and Japan still have quite a bit of bad blood between them. My parents still bring up the stories about the Japanese Imperial Army raping and killing thousands of Chinese woman in Nanjing during World War 2.

I don't think the Chinese government or Chinese people for that matter, have forgotten how much destruction Japan has inflicted on its people.

Now that China is a wealthier country and a military power, they are building up their air and naval military strength to protect themselves from countries that are trying to steal resources from them. They say that they have legitmate claims, and treaties showing that the Diaoyu (Senkaku) islands belong to China in order to send a message to Japan to back off.

What happened to diplomatic solutions to avoid possibly military action?

Can't we all just get along?

__________________
Go Canucks go!
pastarocket is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2013, 08:53 PM   #39
HELP ME PLS!!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 5,544
Thanked 652 Times in 346 Posts
One point that hasn't been mentioned so far is that Diaoyu island aka. Senkaku island is situated around major oil tanker and cargo ship routes. In the future, if any countries in the region impose a military/political intervention, the owner of said island may use it as a strategic advantage to shutdown the flow of resources.
willystyle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2013, 09:03 PM   #40
rsx
Los Bastardo owned my ass at least once
 
rsx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 6,223
Thanked 3,381 Times in 805 Posts
This is where the UN really shows how lame of a duck it is. It's literally the League of Nations 2.0. It can't administer and adjudicate any real issue.
rsx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2013, 09:41 PM   #41
I *heart* Revscene.net very Muchie
 
Acura604's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 3,912
Thanked 1,820 Times in 448 Posts
Ah screw it...Ima gonna go bomb China right now...



Acura604 is online now   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 11-26-2013, 10:16 PM   #42
Willing to sell body for a few minutes on RS
 
RacePace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Richmond
Posts: 11,180
Thanked 1,315 Times in 328 Posts
China is sending an aircraft carrier

United States responds to Chinese 'air identification zone' over Japanese-claimed islands by sending B-52 bombers | News.com.au
__________________
Quote:
Originally posted by Girl
^ Yes it's sad when you stare at the shape of my penis through my overly skin tight jeans and not help but feel like a shameful little boy compared to me.
RacePace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2013, 10:29 PM   #43
I bringith the lowerballerith
 
Brianrietta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: 4906'N12158'W
Posts: 1,106
Thanked 1,132 Times in 308 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoshuaWong View Post
Besides people only tend to remember recent history, China discovered and lay claim to these islands way before Japan took them in WW2, which Japan is suppose to hand over all territory taken by force anyways... Its about time China start fending for its own.
Except that Japan didn't take them in WW2, heck there were at times hundreds of Japanese living on the islands from 1900ish through to 1940ish (the only recorded instance of people living there, I might add). This is a long, but insightful op-ed piece describing the claims to the islands and some potential solutions to the sovereignty dispute:

Getting Senkaku History Right | The Diplomat

Spoiler!
__________________
nabs - Brianrietta are you trying to Mindbomber me? using big words to try to confuse me
jasonturbo - Threesomes: overrated - I didn't really think it was anything special, plus it was degrading, marching to the bathroom to fart all that semen out
Babykiller - And next to that, there's a little dot called a period. It's not the stuff you eat out of your sisters gash, it's a handy little tool for breaking up sentences so they don't look like nonsensical retard garbage.
Brianrietta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2013, 10:30 PM   #44
rsx
Los Bastardo owned my ass at least once
 
rsx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 6,223
Thanked 3,381 Times in 805 Posts
Lol the ONE aircraft carrier they have. I don't know what they're trying to prove with that move.

They should send some more planes over disputed airpsaces and get the carrier to move back and forth.
rsx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2013, 10:45 PM   #45
Even when im right, revscene.net is still right!
 
Yodamaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Burnaby, BC
Posts: 1,324
Thanked 1,481 Times in 465 Posts
Not like they'll do anything, shooting down any plane over disputed airspace would be the most idiotic move in the history of military tactics.
Yodamaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2013, 12:39 AM   #46
HELP ME PLS!!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 5,544
Thanked 652 Times in 346 Posts
Obviously, neither party will do anything, it's all sabrerattling.
willystyle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2013, 01:41 AM   #47
Willing to sell body for a few minutes on RS
 
Manic!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Nanaimo
Posts: 10,408
Thanked 3,823 Times in 1,748 Posts
.........
__________________
I don't need an amplifier I'm already big, best on any track call me the Stig - Shizzo

Dusty Nuggets Rusty Shackleford Cuntar
Manic! is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2013, 08:41 AM   #48
reads most threads with his pants around his ankles, especially in the Forced Induction forum.
 
Mr.HappySilp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 9,542
Thanked 1,663 Times in 846 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yodamaster View Post
Not like they'll do anything, shooting down any plane over disputed airspace would be the most idiotic move in the history of military tactics.
Not if it was an accidents, as we all know a lot of things made in china isn't reible and tend to break or not work casuing an accident.
Mr.HappySilp is online now   Reply With Quote
This post FAILED by:
Old 11-27-2013, 12:50 PM   #49
Revscene.net has a homepage?!
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,242
Thanked 486 Times in 177 Posts
Its the 21st century, wars are fought with money now.

China just needs to keep buying up YEN for their forex reserves to really stick it to Japan.
jackmeister is offline   Reply With Quote
This post thanked by:
Old 11-28-2013, 03:52 AM   #50
My AFC gave me an ABS CEL code of LOL while at WOT!
 
bing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: vancouver, B.C.
Posts: 1,842
Thanked 563 Times in 229 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nlkko View Post
True but only to an extend. I speculate the only reason US is involved is because Japan is one of their closer allies. More than anything, it's a political gesture signifies the Chinese government to simmer down a little bit.

The Chinese government has been bullying other countries of their islands for a while. They have been doing the same thing to Vietnam with disputes over the Paracel Islands since 1974.
Not sure if I agree with the "bullying" term as it seems more like a media thing in response to China's ascent in world power. Also, judging from the claims, some countries are much weaker than others IMO like Brunei and Malaysia. Anyways, thought this was interesting background information on the dispute. Seems like most people here are unaware of it.

Professor Joyner's article: http://www.stimson.org/images/upload...mapspratly.pdf

Quote:
Eight states claim title to these South China Sea islands. Singapore and Malaysia dispute claims over Pisang Island and Pulau Batu Puteh, strategically situated in the congested waters of Malacca and Singapore Straits. China, Taiwan, and Vietnam contest each other’s claims to sovereignty over the Paracel Islands, a group of fifteen islets and several reefs and shoals scattered over a 200-kilometer area in the middle of the Gulf of Tonkin. Taiwan also contests China's claims to Pratas Island and the Macclesfield Bank. As for the Spratlys, six states assert claims: China, Taiwan and Vietnam claim the entire archipelago, while the Philippines, Malaysia and Brunei claim sovereignty over portions of the Spratlys.
China
Quote:
China’s assertions of sovereignty in the South China Sea rest on historical claims of discovery and occupation. The Chinese case is well documented, going back to references made in Chou Ch'u-fei's Ling -Wai- tai-ta (Information on What Lies Beyond the Passes) during the Sung dynasty (12th century) and in the records of Chinese navigators during the Qing dynasty (18th century). Notable problems of authenticity and accuracy exist, however, in describing coastal points as implied references for the Spratly Islands. These problems are compounded by the fundamental question of whether proof of historical title today carries sufficient legal weight to validate acquisition of territory. Modern international law clearly recognizes that mere discovery of some territory is not sufficient to vest in the discoverer valid title of ownership to territory. Rather, discovery only creates inchoate title, which must be perfected by subsequent continuous and effective acts of occupation, generally construed to mean permanent settlement. Evidence of such permanent settlement is not compelling in the case of China's claim to the Spratlys.
Taiwan
Quote:
Claims by Taiwan today mirror those of the PRC and evidence suggests that both governments have made efforts to coordinate positions on Chinese claims in international discussions of the Spratly issue. The legal bases for Taiwan's claims are its longstanding historic ties to the islands. Consequently, Taiwan’s claims suffer from deficiencies like those of the PRC namely, that discovery of, and intermittent contact with, scattered island formations are insufficient cause to establish legal title to sovereignty. Taiwan was the first government to establish a physical presence on one of the Spratlys following the Japanese departure after World War II. Taiwan announced its claim to the atoll in 1947 and has occupied the largest island of the Spratlys, Itu Aba, constantly since 1956. Interestingly enough, this unchallenged exercise of control over Itu Aba for more than four decades may qualify as a display of continuous and peaceful sovereignty, a condition necessary for supporting a legal claim to the island. From the mid-1950s through the late 1980s, Taiwan maintained a force of some
500 soldiers on Itu Aba, although by 1999 the number of troops had been reduced to about 110.
Vietnam
Quote:
The legal grounds for Vietnam’s claims to South China Sea islands flow from historic activities during the Nguyen dynasty (17th–19th centuries). Maps and other supporting historical evidence for Vietnam’s claims were compiled and set out by the government in two white papers, Vietnam’s Sovereignty Over the Hoang Sa and Trung Sa Archipelagoes issued in 1979 and 1982, respectively. Vietnam’s evidence for asserting claims to title is diluted by the failure to specifically identify and distinguish between the Spratly and Paracel archipelagoes. Both island groups are treated generically, without one being geographically distinguished from the other, which has compounded the difficulty of assessing the lawfulness and propriety of claims. Considerable doubts also arise over the authenticity and accuracy of the historical record itself. Such doubts explain why international law usually regards mere historical claims, without evident occupation and permanent settlement, as only arguably binding and susceptible to legal challenge for assuring valid claim to title over territory in the oceans. Vietnam also bases its claims to sovereignty over the Spratlys by right of cession from a French claim to the islands first made in the 1933. The French, however, made no subsequent effort s to perfect title to the Spratlys by occupation. Nor did the French act by returning after Japan’s departure following World War II, or by acting after Japan formally relinquished all title and future claims to the islands at the San Francisco Conference of 1951. Consequently, France possessed no lawful title to the Spratly group to which Vietnam could succeed. In any event, Vietnam moved in 1975 to secure its claim to possession of the Spratlys when it occupied thirteen islands of the group. In September 1989 Vietnam occupied three more islets, and has since taken at least nine additional atolls. By 1999, Vietnam had stationed 600 troops on at least twenty-seven Spratly land formations
Philippines
Quote:
The Philippines justifies its claims to the Spratlys principally on “discovery” of certain islands by Thomas Cloma in 1947. In 1956 Cloma proclaimed the creation of a new island state, “Kalayaan” (Freedomland), with himself as chairman of its Supreme Council. While no government ever recognized the lawfulness of this “state,” Cloma persisted with his claim until 1974, when “ownership” was officially transferred under a “Deed of Assignment and Waiver of Rights” to the Philippine government. The first official claim by the Philippine government came in 1971, mainly in response to a Philippine fishing vessel being fired upon by Taiwanese forces stationed on Itu Aba Island. The Philippine government reacted by protesting the incident and then asserted legal title by annexing islands in the Spratly group based on Cloma's claim. In 1978 the Marcos government formally annexed the archipelago to the Philippines and placed it under the administration of Palawan province. Interestingly enough, the official Philippine position contends that the Kalayaan Islands group are separate and distinct from the Spratlys and Paracels. This Philippine claim is predicated on a geological assertion that the continental shelf of the so-called Kalayaan Island group is juxtaposed to the Palawan Province and extends some 300 miles westward, into the heart of the Philippines’ EEZ. To defend its claims, the Philippines currently has 595 marines stationed on eight islands. These bases are fortified with heavy artillery and are equipped with radar facilities, a weather station, and ammunition depots. More recently, Malaysia and Brunei have asserted claims to certain islands and reefs in the Spratlys, based principally on certain continental shelf provisions in the 1982 LOS Convention. These provisions describe in detail what legally constitutes a “continental shelf” for a state, and the sovereign rights a state may exercise for purposes of exploring and exploiting the resources of its continental shelf.
Malaysia
Quote:
Malaysia has claimed sovereignty over twelve islands in the Spratly group, but those claims appear ill-founded. Serious doubt remains about the legal propriety of Malaysia’s assertions, which arises from Malaysia’s basing its claims to certain islands on ocean law principles associated with prolongation of a continental shelf seaward, rather than the accepted legal means of validating claim to title over territory through permanent occupation. The clear inference from Malaysia’s claims is that a state possessing a continental shelf also possesses sovereign rights over land formations arising seaward from that shelf. That inference is misguided and flawed under contemporary international law. The 1982 LOS Convention neither stipulates nor invites such an interpretation. The Convention does set out a regime for an island, which is defined as a “naturally formed area of land, surrounded by water, which is above water at high tide.” The Convention also gives to a state with established sovereignty over an island the right to exploit living and non-living resources in the water column and on the seabed within that island’s territorial sea, contiguous zone, and exclusive economic zone. he critical legal consideration for acquisition of sovereign title over an island formation, however, is not the geological affinity of a coastal state to island formations arising from continent al shelves offshore. Rather, ownership derives from occupation, demonstrated by a continuous and effective display of sovereignty through permanent settlement. As generally construed, establishing a few military outposts may be considered vestiges of occupation. Even so, for that military presence to meet the test of “effective occupation” through permanent settlement will depend on the longevity of the presence, and whether settlers can be “permanently” attracted to inhabit the region. Such occupation has yet to be effected by Malaysia. Moreover, while Malaysia may use the continental shelf provisions in the 1982 Convention to support its claims to seabed resources, those provisions do not legally uphold assertions to sovereignty over land formations that are permanently above sea level. Malaysia is the most recent claimant to occupy part of the Spratlys militarily. In late 1977, Malay troops were landed on Swallow Reef. Since then, about seventy soldiers have been stationed on three of the twelve islets claimed by Malaysia.
Brunei
Quote:
Brunei has only one claim to the Spratly group, that being to a naturally submerged formation known as Louisa Reef. Similar to Malaysia, the legal premise for substantiating Brunei’s claim flows from continental shelf provisions in the 1982 LOS Convention. Unlike Malaysia’s claims to island formations, however, Louisa Reef is a submarine feature and part of the seabed. Hence, it may be regarded legally as an extension of a continental shelf. The critical point here, of course, is Brunei’s ability to demonstrate that Louisa Reef is indeed part of the extension of its continental shelf. Settlement here is neither necessary nor possible; the key criterion to be satisfied for ownership is whether the continental shelf can be substantiated as a natural prolongation seaward from the coastal territory of Brunei. Granting that, Brunei would enjoy the exclusive right to exploit resources of the reef. Brunei remains the only claimant without a military presence in the Spratly Islands. Even so, Louisa Reef is also claimed by Malaysia, which took possession of it in 1984.
__________________

Cars:
02' Lexus IS300 5spd (rip)
07' BMW 323iA (sold)
05' BMW Z4 5spd (sold)
06' BMW 330i 6spd (sold)
10' Audi A4 quattro
08' BMW M3 6spd
10' Honda Ridgeline
17' Audi Q5

Motorcycles:
15' Kawasaki Ninja300
08' Yamaha R6


Last edited by bing; 11-28-2013 at 01:14 PM.
bing is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:55 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Revscene.net cannot be held accountable for the actions of its members nor does the opinions of the members represent that of Revscene.net